Monday, September 25, 2017

NASCAR Owners say they will fire Drivers who protest National Anthem

NASCAR doesn't fuck around. They have an expectation that their employees will demonstrate professionalism and civility. From Business Insider:
[NASCAR] team owners said they would come down hard on any drivers who did not stand during the national anthem. That included NASCAR legend Richard Petty, owner of Richard Petty Motorsports.

"Anybody that don’t [sic] stand up for the anthem oughta be out of the country, period," Petty said[.] "What got ’em where they’re at? The United States."

When Petty was asked if his drivers would be fired if they protest during the anthem as Trump called for, Petty emphatically said, "You're right."
Athletes brought criticism upon themselves by visibly protesting the Flag and National Anthem. The issue of protesting "something" by athletes is not new and did not begin with what President Donald Trump said on Friday.

Ask the folks who experienced the recent hurricanes and flooding and fires if they care about the coddled, delicate, highly paid athletes whining about criticism for - really - what is nothing more than asking them to demonstrate a fraction of civility and professionalism.

I can respect an athlete who protests (anything) by not exiting the locker room until the National Anthem is finished. Their actions speak louder than those who feel the need to advertise protesting whatever it is they're protesting.

9 comments:

BB-Idaho said...

I guess that is the politically correct thing to do?

David Drake said...

I can only answer your question with a couple of questions - and I hope you reply and let me know your thoughts.

Does an any employer (the NFL, NASCAR, Joe's Widget Inc.) have a reasonable expectation that employee behavior meets a societal threshold of being "acceptable" to others?

Just as any employee has the right to quit their job and find work elsewhere; doesn't any employer reserve the right to fire or dismiss any employee, with or without "cause"?

BB-Idaho said...

I am sort of struck by an election based in part upon frustration with being 'politically correct'. Whatever you do during the National Anthem is apparently framed in proper 'political correctness' seemingly by those who a short time back were adamant
and highly critical at even a whiff of forced 'political correctness'. I most often eat popcorn on the couch during the
opening ceremonies (please don't report me) and sometimes critique
the awful renderings of the Spangled Banner and really have no horse in the race, other than the bemusement suggested above. And yes,
I followed all the rules when assigned to command the flag lowering
ceremony: but mostly because that was the thing to do, not because
some president was threatening to fire me. You know we all have our priorities, and this one is a teapot tempest for this old dude. One thing I can't figure out is that Mrs. BB is the only uber-lib I know that loves NASCAR..me figuring just about anybody can drive on a
paved left turn circle. To sum up, if I were Libertarian, I would be
agonizing over Anthem Police..just saying.

David Drake said...

Hey BB, appreciate your reply.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. The list of things the US needs to do as a govt and as a society is a long list, and the Anthem-Flag issue would be way, way down on the bottom of that list.

I didn't hear Trump say this is a PC issue. Maybe he did and I missed it; entirely possible.

Over the past few days of this issue, I've heard from both active and retired Military people say while they don't agree with the behavior of NFL players who kneel or sit out the Anthem, that that is what they fought for and understand it - even tho they disagree with it.

Then I've heard other Military feel very insulted by the players who do this (NFL / NBA etc).

What someone does in their home while while the Anthem is played is private. It's totally and completely your right to sit on the couch with popcorn. Or for someone not to turn the game on until after the Anthem / Flag is over.

If someone sitting in the stadium, a fan, chooses to remain seated during the Anthem, I'm not going to judge that. I try not to make judgments, "lest we not be judged."

There's a difference - for me - of what someone does in public is different from what they do in private. And, if it's in public, does that person have any impact on the media from their actions. I think we all have a certain degree of expectations of how others act in pubic.

Standing in line at the supermarket or store waiting to check-out...we patiently wait our turn. We don't see someone barge thru the rest of the line, taking "cuts", and bullying their way to be first in line ahead of the other people. On the other side, we've all - most likely - experienced someone in a store yelling and screaming at a clerk or the service counter. Maybe that person is justified in their actions. Maybe, before you or I heard them verbally abusive to the clerk, that person spent 20 minutes diplomatically trying to get their issue resolved and finally just lost their composure. Either way - again at least for me - I kind of feel sorry for the clerk having to listen to someone scream at them.

I'm making a distinction between a reasonable expectation of our fellow human and what we expect from them in public. If a fan in a stadium stand knelt on one knee, or turned their back on the Flag...the camera would unlikely care about that. But when you're on the field, you know you're going to be on camera (most likely). For the minute and a half for the Anthem and Flag, I don't think it unreasonable for anyone to show a minimum of respectful behavior.

I have a 'draft' version I'd been writing but I don't like it, so it won't be published any time soon. And - I'm not even exactly sure what specifically is being protested. The Flag? Racism? The incidents of black people being shot by white cops? Trump? This issue didn't start with Trump. And there's things he's said and tweeted that I wish he'd just not have done because the issue seems so insignificant.

But if the protesting players' issue is racism, then they can't just confine their method of protest to only include racism in America. Racism is all over the globe. And in Africa with black slave owners 'owning' black slaves. If they're protesting slavery - again - slavery is occurring all over the world as I type this. There are African companies using child slave labor to mine cobalt with their HANDS in cobalt mines. No protection, no nothing. They're digging it out by hand. These children won't live to see 20 years old. One cannot pick and choose which type of slavery or racism they will protest and which they will either not acknowledge or, worse, find one form of slavery or racism acceptable.

I'm going to have to continue this below since I'm running out of characters here.....

David Drake said...

To wrap up, an example would be me in a black church, or a Jewish synagogue, or somewhere where my public behavior conforms to an acceptable expectation of how I should behave in those conditions. And that's the point I'm making - or tried to make.

Also, and I'm generalizing, it seems the general public has really become tired of hearing politics mixed into sports and entertainment. If I were to limit myself to only enjoying art, films, sports, etc to those only created by and performed by Conservatives, I'd be greatly eliminating a whole bunch of good stuff to experience created by people who are "liberal". I like a lot of movies or art, or whatever, that is created by people of all political beliefs and those with no political beliefs.

Those who disagree with protesting players have as much right to voice their opinion as those who do the protesting.

As for the Libertarian comment, yes, I am. But I don't agree 100% with their political platform. I don't agree with anyone or any organization 100%. Hell, I don't even agree with myself 100% of the time. I hold the same standard and apply it equally. I've ripped on Republicans as much as I've ripped on Dems or Libs. So I'm not agonizing over the Anthem police.

So, rather than framing this within the PC mentality, to be redundant - it's more of what I said: that we have a minimum threshold of what we consider acceptable pubic behavior.

Luke 10.8 @ http://biblehub.com/luke/10-8.htm - "When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you." To a MUCH lesser extent..."when in Rome...." You know what I mean ?

Regarding employer/employee standards of behavior; most of us have some sort of defined standard of how we need to act. And, I read this elsewhere, it's not in the NFL handbook, but it is in the players handbook that 'players are to stand at the sidelines while the Flag and Anthem occurs." Heh - the NFL can put a stop to spiking the ball, and they can fine a play $30K for looking at the ref the wrong way, but they can't request their players show 90 seconds of quiet, decent, respect ? The players certainly could have chosen a far more disrespectful and obnoxious manner to protest. And it's not that they should do what's expected of them because of what Trump said. I agree with you there.

Would public perception be different if Christian players decided to protest Islam prior to playing a game of soccer in Eqypt? In the NHL, when a Canadian and US team play, both Anthems are played and the players and fans accept that and behave in a manner respectful to both.

Just noticed an omission on the above part 1 of my comment on the cobalt issue: "African COUNTRIES" - not companies. In China, safety nets were put up outside of buildings where Apple phones are manufactured. The working conditions were so bad, workers jumped out of the windows and committed suicide rather than work in the conditions they had. Relax the working conditions? No. Put up nets to catch people who'd rather die than put pieces together to make another IPhone.

In a rambling sort of way, the above is the unabridged version of my post :) But who would read a post that long? I wouldn't. Long posts result in MEGO= "My Eyes Glaze Over" :)

MrsBB watches NASCAR - that's great. Has she said what it is she finds makes her like it? Just curious.

Final question: how do you feel the exchanges you and I have had in comments have gone: better than / worse than / or the same as some of the comment exchanges you mentioned you've encountered in comment sections at other sites? :)


BB-Idaho said...

Understood. Though a relatively minor issue for me, you summarize
the spectrum of perceptions in the matter. I find TD celebrations in the end zone irritating and ponder racial culture and sportsmanship.
And your mention of religion brings to mind the batters that cross themselves when they get in the box and Tim Tebow's TD genuflection
and Michaelangelo-like reaching out a finger to touch God's. I'm inclined to add to the paraphrasing of the Luke verse, "Never look a gift horse in the mouth"...and note in passing that it is true: libertarians, unlike their fundamentalist brethren, then not to foam at the mouth. Business rules: yep, they are sort of a Code of Conduct
if thoughtfully written and adhered to. My business biases probably
show up, but I spent a career in private business at a number of levels and still recall an egregious example of how not to: We were
extremely busy and a forklift driver had worked two consecutive shifts. They asked the guy to continue straight into a third shift
and he began to cry. His wife was in the hospital about to give birth and he wanted to be there. He was summarily fired on the spot.
This was still going through my mind when two weeks later, another
forklift driver came to work drunk, took out a pistol and pretty well shot up the warehouse. He was counseled.

BB-Idaho said...

One of my interests is the development of early Christianity from a
historical/linquistic POV and the verse from Luke brought to mind the
early battles between St. Paul and the gentiles vs St. Peter and St. James and the jewish law. "Eat what is offered to you" IMO, refers
to the strict adherence of the jewish apostles to kosher law. We
note:
"When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group."
-Galatians 2:11-13
[To Paul's dismay, the rest of the Jewish Christians in Antioch sided with Peter, including Paul's long-time associate Barnabas:

The rest of the Jews joined in this charade and even Barnabas was drawn into the hypocrisy.

The Acts of the Apostles relates a fallout between Paul and Barnabas soon after the Council of Jerusalem, but gives the reason as the fitness of John Mark to join Paul's mission (Acts 15:36–40). Acts also describes the time when Peter went to the house of a gentile. Acts 11:1–3 says:

The apostles and the believers throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcised believers criticized him and said, "You went into the house of the uncircumcised and ate with them."]

Paul's views prevailed as the Peter/James Ebionites faded into
the mists of history, persecuted by both Christians and the Roman
Legions; the latter groups becoming one under Constantine. Unrelated to the National Anthem except to note that even religious sects have
their 'political correctness. :)

David Drake said...

That is a shame about the forklift driver being fired. If it was a Union job, I hope he went to them and was supported. Or, retained an attorney and sued. A third-shift OT operating machinery is dangerous to all. And I get the situational contrast with the drunk driver who was counseled.

Am I comming across to you as foaming at the mouth ?!

David Drake said...

@ BB #7 comment; It's an interesting coincidence that I happen to be currently reading "Acts." Just small sections at a time. And, not that you asked but I don't want anyone to think I'm trying to come off as one of God's better examples of being a Christian. Far from it.

Absolutely agree religious denominations have their PC beliefs &/or internal discrimination. All groups do. I used the "eat what is presented" example more generally than specific to the direct Biblical sense.

So much minor strife in life could be avoided if more people, everywhere and of all race, color, creed, gender, could agree to disagree. And that's everywhere; pervasive far too much.